When it comes to the position of women, a more liberal (or politically savvy) Huckabee has emerged in 2008.
» Back to full entry
» Back to full entry
What Islam Really Says About Violence, Rights and Other Religions
Gomaa, Fadlallah, Mubarak, Khan, Siddiqi, Ellison, others | On Faith
Featured Comments
I find it ludicrous that people would bother to debate Mike Huckabee's interpretations here. He's a politician trying to persuade a nation that a man who believes the earth was created about 6,000 years ago in six days (oh, never mind those 65 million year old dinosaur bones in natural history museums the world over; or carbon dating; or the DNA technology that's getting convicted felons out of jail by proving they didn't do it, or that identifies paternity in child support cases!) is fit to lead the most technologically advanced nation on the planet in the 21st century. Huckabee knows that he has to soft-pedal some of this stuff or he'll lose the votes of, say, moderate Republicans who don't want an embarrassing replay of the Moron-In-Chief Years. I know some of those - if Huckabee is the nominee, they're going to vote for Obama if they get the chance. Huckabee's remarks on the situation in Pakistan a few weeks ago were infantile and stupid and showed no grasp of foreign affairs whatsoever. What does it matter if he also subscribe to St. Paul's dictum about submissive wives?! Get real folks - this little bit of Ephesians has no bearing on modern society whatosever, and the fact that we have a potential nominee for president in the year 2008 who has to explain whether or not he subscribes to it tells you just how big a problem the U.S. has!
January 14, 2008 6:34 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on January 14, 2008 18:34